netdev - Re: [PATCH net 1/3] bonding: set AD_RX_PORT

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <aShTD0PAqLOtQChR@fedora>
Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2025 13:33:03 +0000
From: Hangbin Liu <liuhangbin@...il.com>
To: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@...hat.com>
Cc: netdev@...r.kernel.org, Jay Vosburgh <jv@...sburgh.net>,
	Andrew Lunn <andrew+netdev@...n.ch>,
	"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
	Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
	Jakub Kicinski <kuba@...nel.org>, Simon Horman <horms@...nel.org>,
	Mahesh Bandewar <maheshb@...gle.com>, Shuah Khan <shuah@...nel.org>,
	linux-kselftest@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH net 1/3] bonding: set AD_RX_PORT_DISABLED when disabling
 a port

On Thu, Nov 27, 2025 at 11:15:24AM +0100, Paolo Abeni wrote:
> On 11/24/25 5:33 AM, Hangbin Liu wrote:
> > When disabling a port’s collecting and distributing states, updating only
> > rx_disabled is not sufficient. We also need to set AD_RX_PORT_DISABLED
> > so that the rx_machine transitions into the AD_RX_EXPIRED state.
> > 
> > One example is in ad_agg_selection_logic(): when a new aggregator is
> > selected and old active aggregator is disabled, if AD_RX_PORT_DISABLED is
> > not set, the disabled port may remain stuck in AD_RX_CURRENT due to
> > continuing to receive partner LACP messages.
> > 
> > The __disable_port() called by ad_disable_collecting_distributing()
> > does not have this issue, since its caller also clears the
> > collecting/distributing bits.
> > 
> > The __disable_port() called by bond_3ad_bind_slave() should also be fine,
> > as the RX state machine is re-initialized to AD_RX_INITIALIZE.
> 
> Given the above, why don't you apply the change in
> ad_agg_selection_logic() only, to reduce the chances of unintended side
> effects?
> 
> /P
> 

I think setting port->sm_rx_state = AD_RX_PORT_DISABLED and
slave->rx_disabled = 1 should be an atomic operation. The later 2 functions
just did similar stuff(not same the fixed one) on other places.

Thanks
Hagnbin